Which Playoff Exit Was Most Disappointing To You?

[rascal]

With all due respect to the .4 game and the Manu foul game, the 1979 loss to the Bullets was the worst playoff loss in franchise history. And it's not even close. You have to put that series in its proper context. The Spurs had just joined the league after the ABA merger a couple of seasons earlier, and there was a palpable dislike for the ABA teams, mostly coming from the likes of that asshole Red Auerbach (RIP) who derided the league at every opportunity.

The ABA was thought of as inferior. It was thought of as bush league (which it was, of course). But say what you will, the ABA had just as many talented players as the NBA. Even with all of their condescending , the NBA teams had no problem pilfering the talent from the ABA, turning some of its teams from crap to compe ive. Artis went to the Bulls and immediately made them respectable. Dr. J was the most dynamic player in the world at the time and was sold to the Sixers so the Nets could afford to join the league. Moses ended up in Houston. Maurice Lucas was huge for Portland's championship. But the NBA never gave the ABA teams respect, and the ABA guys all played with a chip on their shoulder because of it.

In any event, winning that series would've legitimized the ABA and the Spurs. The Spurs were up 3-1 on the Bullets, and choked the series, aided by one of the worst flops in NBA history when they called an offensive foul on Billy Paultz as he was setting a pick in the final minute of game 7. It was just an awful call. Washington went on to win the finals against Seattle, and the Spurs never got that close again really until 1999. And truthfully, by 1999, I sort of thought of the Spurs as the Boston Red Sox of the NBA. Always good, never good enough to win it all, and always cursed.

To me, anything after 1999 is gravy. So we lost to the Lakers on a time keeper's screwup? So what, we won the le the previous and following year. Big deal. Same thing with Manu's foul. Complaining about those two is just being spoiled at this point.

This sums it all up. If you were alive and following the spurs in 1979 which many here who are answering .4 or last year were not, its 1979, and for the exact reasons given in your post.

[Cherry]

Trade Manu!.............. oh, wait...

[Don Quixote]

1. 2004 (.4). Absolutely the worst. Up 2-0, we had those chumps. The way Detroit handled them in the finals only made it worse.

2. 2001 (Sweep) Yes, it was disappointing, as we had the best record that year. But, that was a very, very, very good Lakers team. One of the best teams of all time. But I would have liked to have seen more fight in our guys.

3. 1995 (Hakeemed). I'm still not over that team. Should have been our first le.

4. 2006 (Enough Said) We got Dirked. Worst of all, Dallas fouled the whole thing up, after all the good work they did in finally beating us.

5. 1994 (Maloned) No, that team wasn't that good. Utah was much better that season.

6. 1990 (Strickland's no look pass) Pretty disappointing.

[SpursWoman]

all of them sucked... wtf?

I don't find any one of them less pleasant than another.

[Melmart1]

95 sucked donkey balls, i was away at college and trying to study for finals. It was a miserable, miserable time.

2004 sucked cus Spurs would have had a 3peat if they had won that year, and all this bull talk of not being able to repeat would have been put to rest three years ago. I also have personal reasons why 2004 is memorable, but I have talked about that already and won't get into it again.

2006 hurt, but when the Mavs choked in the Finals, I have to admit a little bit of the sting was taken away

[Avitus1]

I hate losing to the Mavs, and last year was horrible!

[Soul_Patch]

I was only 2 in 79...so i dont remember it

[FromWayDowntown]

For all of the historical reasons that Mitch steen cited, I think 1979 has to be among the hardest for Spurs fans who go back that far. Being one of the few clubs to concede a 3-1 lead in a playoff series is bad enough; but having done it in a conference finals at a time when respectability was hard to come made it that much worse.

Washington didn't go on to win the le in 1979 -- Washington was the defending champion at that point and ended up losing the Finals to Seattle 1-4.

I don't I ever really watched the series for the Spurs in 99-00 but I find it hard that David Robinson..who wasn't that bad at the time, couldn't lead the Spurs out of the first round against the Suns.

The Spurs lost a first round series against the Suns in 1992, but David Robinson didn't play in that series, which goes some distance towards explaining the series loss.

In David's years with the Spurs, they lost in the first round to Golden State in 1991, to Phoenix in 1992 (without David), and to Utah in 1994.

[slayermin]

Great points about 1979.

0.4 for me because it was the Lakers.

If we had won in 2004, it would have evened our playoff record with Phil Jackson and go one up on Kobe and Shaq. I am not so sure if we win the championship that year but it would have been an interesting series with Detroit.

The Spurs/Lakers rivalry between 1998 and 2004 is one of the greatest in NBA History. The fact that they added Karl Malone and Gary Payton was straight out of a DC Comic. The villains all join forces to defeat the superhero.

[degenerate_gambler]

1979 w/o a doubt.

SA had just beaten Dr. J's 76ers to win their first ever playoff series in the NBA. Then blowing a 3-1 lead and having John Vanak call that crap foul against Paultz in Game 7...not to mention the "mysterious" power failure that occurred in the 3rd qtr of that game, at a time when the Spurs were comfortably in the lead and in thorough control.

[Obstructed_View]

Last year by far. Every other year the Spurs' players were just unable to do it, for whatever reason. Last year the coach made the players do it with a big part of their team tied to the bench, and it was just enough to cost them the season. If not for that we could be looking at the Spurs trying to threepeat, which would have cemented their legacy.